That is really interesting. What I am curious about is why out of so many kings and myths to choose from why pick Tutankhaumun? Does it mention what was the relic that was supposed to have been on the ship?

If memory serves king Tut became associated with a curse because the guy who funded the excavation, Lord Carnavan, died soon after of an infection from a mosquito bite. But nothing happened to Carter, the guy who actually discovered and dug out the tomb.
Tut was actually a minor king. He is famous only because his tomb is a rare example of one that escaped looting.
It was found intact with all of its treasure. When I went to Egypt it was explained to me that his tomb was under another king's tomb, so robbers never bothered to look there.

There is a story about an ancient Egyptian princess, sometimes king, whose mummifed corpse continually changed hands, and was sent from Egypt to England, where the British Museum had it displyed for a while. Those who had either touched or been near the artifact, either died or suffered from near-fatal injuries. Apparently upon experiencing mysterious deaths of their own, the British Museum gave up displaying it and decided to ship it as far away as possible, and so sent it to New York... and the Titanic took the artifact along on its maiden voyage. Obviously the artifact never arrived, but went down to the bottom of the ocean instead. This is just a rumour.

I first heard this story in Barbara Smith's Canadian Ghost Stories, and from one search on google found many other versions of the tale as well. This is one of them: http://www.catchpenny.org/titanic.html. Charles Pellegrino's account of the story, about half-way down, most closely resembles Barbara Smith's version, which is the one I mentioned above. Her's is an interesting one, as she includes another intriguing aspect, regarding author Morgan Robertson.